The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Created by a blocked sock, the article is an accumulation of
POV and
OR. Only a section is sourced (that section contains unsourced content, as a matter of fact). No reliable academic source connects the events or their reasons/outcome together. The article contains many undesirable phrases like "terrorist" and "extremist" (per
WP:Terrorist). Almost all of the article elaborates only on
Ustashe, indicating that the article was created to promote certain views of the banned sock. The sourced content could be moved to
Ustashe.
Ktrimi991 (
talk)
13:22, 12 May 2018 (UTC)reply
Keep - No valid arguments for deletion. The topic is certainly notable. Eventual issues can be resolved by reaching consensus per Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions. --
Antidiskriminator (
talk)
13:39, 12 May 2018 (UTC)reply
Comment - Agnostic as of the moment. The page does seem to violate
WP:TERRORIST on a lot of points (look the Ustasha were awful is the terrorist the right word? Unsure on that...), and poorly sourced or totally unsourced lists like this instead of prose are frowned upon as per manner of style. Agnostic as to whether this is
WP:TNT. Additionally, a good page on this topic would need to have info on the state veneration of the famous terrorist
Gavrilo Princip whose house was made into a museum and who was considered a national hero, while the organization he was an operator for, Black Hand, went onto inspire many other terrorist outfits. --
Calthinus (
talk)
18:30, 12 May 2018 (UTC)reply
Keep The article certainly has multiple significant problems, as users have pointed out. However, from the nomination I do not see under wich
WP:DEL-REASON it falls. We generally aim at improving bad articles, instead of deleting them. Maybe you could consider cutting it back to a stub or merging it.
wikitigresito (
talk)
19:33, 12 May 2018 (UTC)reply
@
Ktrimi991: Hey, thanks for the answer. From my perspective the issues you have listed are certainly problematic, but do not constitute reasons for deletion. That's why I asked which of the reasons listed exactly applies. It would be good for us to have a comprehensive, high-quality article on terrorism in Yugoslavia, a topic that is obviously seems to be notable. Therefore, I oppose deleting the article.
wikitigresito (
talk)
23:59, 12 May 2018 (UTC)reply
Keep although the text certainly needs improvement and sourcing. The word "terrorism" is heavily loaded, so a change in the title itself might subsequently be considered. In modern-day Croatia, for instance, many of the actions listed in the article are considered part of a perceived, legitimate resistance. (On that, witness also suggestion by
23 editor, above, to merge into an article about "Croatian resistance.")-
The Gnome (
talk)
06:51, 13 May 2018 (UTC)reply
My proposal is practically delete the unsourced content and merge the sourced one. Almost all editors who have participated here so far have underlined merging as a viable solution to the many problems of this article. If other editors support this or a similar option, it would be of help if they specify what content should me merged (all of the article or the sourced parts of it).
Ktrimi991 (
talk)
18:31, 14 May 2018 (UTC)reply
Merge because after an editor removed the unsourced text, the article is about the Ustashe only. It gives the wrong impression that all of such bad acts in Yugoslavia were made by the Ustashe.
Tiimiii (
talk)
17:14, 26 May 2018 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Created by a blocked sock, the article is an accumulation of
POV and
OR. Only a section is sourced (that section contains unsourced content, as a matter of fact). No reliable academic source connects the events or their reasons/outcome together. The article contains many undesirable phrases like "terrorist" and "extremist" (per
WP:Terrorist). Almost all of the article elaborates only on
Ustashe, indicating that the article was created to promote certain views of the banned sock. The sourced content could be moved to
Ustashe.
Ktrimi991 (
talk)
13:22, 12 May 2018 (UTC)reply
Keep - No valid arguments for deletion. The topic is certainly notable. Eventual issues can be resolved by reaching consensus per Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions. --
Antidiskriminator (
talk)
13:39, 12 May 2018 (UTC)reply
Comment - Agnostic as of the moment. The page does seem to violate
WP:TERRORIST on a lot of points (look the Ustasha were awful is the terrorist the right word? Unsure on that...), and poorly sourced or totally unsourced lists like this instead of prose are frowned upon as per manner of style. Agnostic as to whether this is
WP:TNT. Additionally, a good page on this topic would need to have info on the state veneration of the famous terrorist
Gavrilo Princip whose house was made into a museum and who was considered a national hero, while the organization he was an operator for, Black Hand, went onto inspire many other terrorist outfits. --
Calthinus (
talk)
18:30, 12 May 2018 (UTC)reply
Keep The article certainly has multiple significant problems, as users have pointed out. However, from the nomination I do not see under wich
WP:DEL-REASON it falls. We generally aim at improving bad articles, instead of deleting them. Maybe you could consider cutting it back to a stub or merging it.
wikitigresito (
talk)
19:33, 12 May 2018 (UTC)reply
@
Ktrimi991: Hey, thanks for the answer. From my perspective the issues you have listed are certainly problematic, but do not constitute reasons for deletion. That's why I asked which of the reasons listed exactly applies. It would be good for us to have a comprehensive, high-quality article on terrorism in Yugoslavia, a topic that is obviously seems to be notable. Therefore, I oppose deleting the article.
wikitigresito (
talk)
23:59, 12 May 2018 (UTC)reply
Keep although the text certainly needs improvement and sourcing. The word "terrorism" is heavily loaded, so a change in the title itself might subsequently be considered. In modern-day Croatia, for instance, many of the actions listed in the article are considered part of a perceived, legitimate resistance. (On that, witness also suggestion by
23 editor, above, to merge into an article about "Croatian resistance.")-
The Gnome (
talk)
06:51, 13 May 2018 (UTC)reply
My proposal is practically delete the unsourced content and merge the sourced one. Almost all editors who have participated here so far have underlined merging as a viable solution to the many problems of this article. If other editors support this or a similar option, it would be of help if they specify what content should me merged (all of the article or the sourced parts of it).
Ktrimi991 (
talk)
18:31, 14 May 2018 (UTC)reply
Merge because after an editor removed the unsourced text, the article is about the Ustashe only. It gives the wrong impression that all of such bad acts in Yugoslavia were made by the Ustashe.
Tiimiii (
talk)
17:14, 26 May 2018 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.